About Reality Podcast

To be honest, as I upload this episode I am realizing I may have expressed this sentiment in a previous recording, that the philosopher must first learn how to love if they are to practice philosophy aright. 'Philosophy' as a 'love of wisdom', where emphasis always seems placed on the wisdom, rather than the love; however, to love is to transcend one's self concern for the concern of another, and to learn how to do this is the beginning of wisdom, for why else seek to be wise? Unless one equates wisdom with utlitarian knowledge an individual may possess which they can then use to their advantage, including over others. We don't equate wisdom with such a thing in this podcast series, though. As always, if you are enjoying the episodes, consider (seriously) becoming a supporter on my Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/esdallaire?view_as=patron

If I am going to claim to practice philosophy, and ostensibly occupy the position of philosopher and represent myself as such, I better be able to back that up by what I am saying. That's a pretty simple description of a basic responsibility of the philosopher, but it applies to anyone professing to be any identifiable figure and impactful member within society, that they must speak like that person they present themselves as: doctor, police officer, lawyer, veterinarian, history professor. Speaking with the integrity of one who has dedicated themselves to truly be ___, may just be at the core of any endeavour in this life—one must choose their words with much consideration of their intent, and of course the philosopher is compelled to ask how anyone can be certain of their intention, and their desire to be. Please consider supporting me on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/esdallaire?view_as=patron

In this episode, philosophers are those who have become cognizant of the moral weight of their thought, and are concerned by it. In fact, they see thinking as equivalent with the recognition of the moral impact of their being within reality; in other words, they think that to be amoral is to be without thought, while to be immoral is to act against the inevitable conclusions of thought, which are always underscored by the acknowledgement of the moral consequence of our being.

Low energy episode. First one recorded in weeks, and I'm uploading it to see how it feels. Another idea for this episode's title could be: 'Moments of Empty Satisfaction'. Peace and love to you

A guest episode with Nikole, wherein we discuss David Foster Wallace's 'Infinite Jest' and the societal problems which the individuals in his novel must grapple and cope with, as they realize in this life they have one of two choices to make: succumb to endless pleasure for lack of any other option, or else delay their gratification for the sake of a lifestyle that is healthier for them mentally and physically.

Picked this book up at a used book store two weeks ago - just getting started on it, and so far it is dynamite!   Thank you for tuning in! 

This episode is relaunching the series, so in it I spend time stating what is the purpose and intention of continuing with the 'About Reality' Podcast. I am very excited to resume podcasting about philosophy, and this episode (conveniently a round number, at 50) is the beginning of a much more regular series exploring all manner of philosophical ideas, from the past as well as -- maybe -- from the present, so long as we find philosophers in the present stating new things that turn out to be necessary for the conduct of philosophical living.

This episode about how the thoughts we are able to think are limited or bounded by the assumptions we hold about reality, including notions of time, of the freedom of the individual versus determination, etc., and how the discoveries of philosophers are phenomena used to think beyond those limits. The question is whether philosophers have discovered all that there is to uncover about humankind and their presence in the world—and then, if they have, where does that leave us in the present age?   Thank you for tuning in! Please subscribe and rate! It's very much appreciated.

What does it take for an individual, or a nation, to forget what history has inscribed on their land and their psyche, in order to be able to see the reality of the moment for what it is, and resolve the historical tension and conflict diplomatically in order to envision together a different world for tomorrow? What role does philosophy play in this?   Thank you for tuning in! Please subscribe and rate! It's very much appreciated.

Let's forget everything we thought we knew, without letting go of all that we've gained.   Thank you for tuning in! Please subscribe and rate! It's very much appreciated.   'About Reality' Substack: https://aboutreality.substack.com/ Also, check out the YouTube channel of this series, where you can find the video recording: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaiMn_zH9BcGGLAlNVYIcLw?app=desktop

Exploring a classical philosophical question today, owing to the past month where I've undergone a change in perspective in my valuation of knowledge gained through books and theory versus what is gained through accepting that we can't think our way out of our bodily experience and what we're bounded to in these corporeal forms filled with desire and instinct.   Thank you for tuning in! Please subscribe and rate! It's very much appreciated.   Check out the 'About Reality' Substack: https://aboutreality.substack.com/ Also, check out the YouTube channel of this series, where you can find the video recording: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaiMn_zH9BcGGLAlNVYIcLw?app=desktop

Still searching for the philosopher as heroic figure embodying the spirit of the present age, and the need we may have, insofar as we are seekers of truth, to find someone who practices a wisdom grounded in corporeal reality while simultaneously maintaining a view toward higher, perhaps even eternal, truth. How do we do this in the globalized, modern world, using the instruments provided to us as conscious, embodied beings, even as our local, personal experience is cheapened in the vision of the globalized world.   Thank you for tuning in! Please subscribe and rate! It's very much appreciated.   Also, check out the YouTube channel of this series, where you can find the video recording: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaiMn_zH9BcGGLAlNVYIcLw?app=desktop

This weekend I was reading the second part of Kant's 'Critique of Judgment', as well as the fourth book of volume one of Schopenhauer's 'The World as Will and Representation', and in this episode I get to talking about both of them, particularly in their relevance to the protagonist in the novel I am writing, Anatole. This project involving this podcast and my writing is coming together, folks, and you're here for the start of it! Thank you for your support!   Thank you for tuning in! Please subscribe and rate! It's very much appreciated.

Here we make an argument that 'good' and 'bad' are stagnant terms for evaluating emergent phenomena in an ever-changing world, and that as terms of judgment they refer back to a static and traditionally conservative worldview, where 'good' and 'evil' are eternal presences in the cosmos and the world is a battleground between them in which humans too take part. There's certainly a case to be made for the coherent order this provides the individual desperate for a way of making sense of what is otherwise the chaos of existence, but in this episode I introduce the possibility of supplanting ethical theory with an aesthetic one that is more appropriate and accommodating of the modern world and our experience of it.   Thank you for tuning in! Please subscribe and rate! It's very much appreciated.

Can a philosopher of ethics get away without a metaphysics to support or corroborate their ethical theory? Can a metaphysician get away with leaving unexamined the existence of good and evil, as well as free will, which informs good and bad action? In this episode, we use Mr. Ramsey from Virginia Woolf's 'To the Lighthouse', as well as Socrates, as exemplary case studies of one version of the philosopher—the ethicist without a metaphysics—and the other—the metaphysician whose own conduct is his blind spot when examining reality.   Thank you for tuning in! Please subscribe and rate! It's very much appreciated.

So many centuries later, still we philosophers are asking the question as to the right way of being. In this episode we contribute two facts about life which may be essential to the discussion: one, that 'to be' is to have no choice but to act, in order to persist; two, that life is movement, and it resists anything that would cause it to grind to a halt. What does that have to do with the philosopher being the life of the party? Tune in to find out!   Thank you for tuning in! Please subscribe and rate! It's very much appreciated.   Check out the About Reality Substack: https://aboutreality.substack.com/

Whenever I read Cormac McCarthy I always want to talk about the visionary nature of his work and aesthetic, and my current reading of 'The Crossing' is no different. We jump right into it, and by the end of the episode we come up with one definition of the value of art (that it prompts an individual to ask questions which their day-to-day life does not require them to ask), and we also contemplate the need for a conflict at the heart of an artist's work, and whether these conflicts are in fact real, or simply imagined and supported by the artist's insistence upon them, for the sake of their art.   Thank you for tuning in! Please subscribe and rate! It's very much appreciated.

The episode begins with an announcement that I've started working on a novel, the choice having been made following an inspiring conversation I had this past weekend with my tattoo artist. I take a moment to explain how that might affect the release of new episodes in this podcast series. The rest of the episode explores what a novel written these days achieves, and whether that achievement is enticing for a so-called philosopher, such as myself, who would like to think they're slowly wending their way down one of the multiple pathways which sooner or later all lead to the Truth about reality. Is writing a novel a distraction from such a path, or is it just another route which ends where I think I would like to end, as philosopher? Such questions I ask in this episode.   Thank you for tuning in! Please subscribe and rate! It's very much appreciated.

Speaking on consciousness in this episode, which is a question and phenomenon I don't usually dwell on as philosopher; hopefully I bring something new to the discussion with today's podcast.   Thank you for tuning in! Please subscribe and rate! It's very much appreciated.   Follow E. S. Dallaire on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ESDallaire

The irony of today's social and political climate is that so many individual voices, in our so-called democracy, are insisting that their voices be heard and their status as self-defining individuals recognized for the sake of social harmony. In other words, we have individuals—call them activists—who feel within themselves that they will not rest until the group which they represent, even if it's a group of one, is acknowledged by the current social order—even if that means upending the current social order entirely. In part this is an unfair description of an activist. In part this is a consequence of many self-proclaimed activists, whose voice is so loud they are shaping the conversation, also existing within an elitist milieu, where self-assertion and a careerist mindset and agenda are a part of their conception of activism. In this episode we go deep into what is described as a 'perennial psychological drama', and we address it with a helping hand from Schopenhauer.     Thank you for tuning in! Please subscribe and rate! It's very much appreciated.   Follow E. S. Dallaire on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ESDallaire